Lew Rockwell Blog on Ron Paul's New Strategy-a Must Read

[stu2002]

Some historical perspective for Ron Paul activists
Posted by Ryan W. McMaken on May 15, 2012 12:47 AM

I've been somewhat surprised by the absolutely hysterical reaction among some RP activists to Ron Paul's announcement that he's shifting resources toward winning more delegates instead of blowing it on straw polls in new primaries. In some of the forums, alleged "supporters" are hurling insults at both Ron and his staffers.

I remember how after 2008, some people I talked to pledged to "never give money ever again" to Ron Paul because he "wasn't serious" about winning. These people think elections are all that matter, but that's not how political and intellectual movements work. The election of numerous libertarian candidates will be a lagging indicator, not a leading indicator, of the success of a libertarian movement. The population still isn't there. Although it will be.

It's absolutely unbelievable that some people who claim to be champions of freedom are now viciously badmouthing a man who can claim much credit in making libertarianism a household word -as it now is- and has been instrumental in building the most important challenge to central banking and the warfare state in a century. All of this is in addition to taking control of the GOP machinery in numerous states and cong. districts.

I might also note that I turned on the tele the other day and there was Ron Paul talking about central banking. Note to newcomer activists: I know it's hard to believe, but before RP's 2008 run, there was once a time when libertarians weren't on TV regularly talking about Austrian free-market economics and the evils of war. I swear it's true. Cross my heart and hope to die.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/112112.html

 

[kathy88]

Great read. Thanks for posting Stu.

 

[stu2002]

Great read. Thanks for posting Stu.

You're welcome.

 

[Exiled_LFOD]

Too bad Anarchists can't understand reality.

 

[wgadget]

A great time to HIGHLY RECOMMEND my all-time favorite blog: www.lewrockwell.com

 

[stu2002]

POLITICO links to Daily Paul thread debating what Ron Pauls email means

While the media was quick to report that Ron Paul’s statement Monday signaled something akin to an end to his campaign, there’s a robust debate on the Daily Paul blog that reveals his supporters think otherwise.

One widely-held opinion is that the press is willfully misinterpreting Paul’s statement about his intentions.

More than a few commenters think the statement is part of a Paul campaign gambit to lull the establishment, Romney forces or the media into complacency.

Among those who read the statement as a suspension of the campaign, there’s a good bit of disappointment, not to mention disbelief.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/charl...paul-backers-debate-his-statement-123422.html

 

[Travlyr]

Good article.

I was amazed at the reaction on this forum. Ron Paul is a truth teller. That is all he was doing in his email... telling the truth. There is not enough money to run ads on TV and who would want to anyway? Bribing the media to not lie in 30 second ads just never seemed like a good strategy to me.

 

[stu2002]

Good article.

I was amazed at the reaction on this forum. Ron Paul is a truth teller. That is all he was doing in his email... telling the truth. There is not enough money to run ads on TV and who would want to anyway? Bribing the media to not lie in 30 second ads just never seemed like a good strategy to me.

indeed

 

[V3n]

Short and sweet. Well said!

 

[stu2002]

A great time to HIGHLY RECOMMEND my all-time favorite blog: www.lewrockwell.com

Yep--doesn't Ron Paul read it daily?

 

[Oddone]

Good read.

However did we have that many people attacking Ron Paul and the campaign for 'not' running ads and gunning for primaries anymore on this forum? I may have missed it, and forgive me for doing so. What I saw was a lot of people getting pissed that the press release was done the way it was, or at all I suppose. Along with everyone screaming about the MSM and their spin on it. Then again, I'm not on here 24/7 nor do I read the Daily Paul most days, unless something is linked.

 

[wgadget]

Yep--doesn't Ron Paul read it daily?

Yes, I believe he said he does. He is also a regular contributor there.

 

[fisharmor]

Too bad Anarchists can't understand reality.

In case anyone forgot (like I did), you click on the name of the user, and it's the third option on the left side of the screen.

 

[Liberty74]

Yet the word libertarian still has a bad taste in most Republican's mouth. The libertarian movement has been around for about a generation and it still isn't where it needs to be or where I would like it to be to use its muscles to change public opinion. Why? Because its the system ran by the elites. The political system. The media system. The corporate system. The educational system all the way up to college. They control practically everything including the two party system.

On face value I do believe most people are libertarian - supports smaller govt yet are socially liberal at the private level. People in general don't want the govt in their lives. But the people are stuck in the matrix of the two party system. Don't believe me? Just look at the Tea Party supporting a bailout lover and the architect of Obamacare. They are forced to by - what for it - the system. And that is why nothing changes.

 

[Matthanuf06]

He hit it the nail on the head. It's always been about building the movement and there is nothing wrong with that. Sometimes people just fall victim to thinking we are a lot closer to the nomination than what we actually were.

 

[whippoorwill]

Nice.

 

[tbone717]

He hit it the nail on the head. It's always been about building the movement and there is nothing wrong with that. Sometimes people just fall victim to thinking we are a lot closer to the nomination than what we actually were.

It is about a movement and the long term viability of it. Rome wasn't built in a day.

As far as people thinking that we were a lot closer to the nomination than we actually were, I think a lot of that has to do with the fact that many people are new to the process and do not understand how it truly works. They come to sites like this, read posts from people saying that we are going to win this in Tampa, and take that as fact. Of course anyone who says, "well we aren't as close to that as you think" is accused of being a troll - because sadly people would rather be blind to the reality of the situation than accept it, and work within the constructs of reality.

The plain and simple truth is that you win the nomination by winning primaries. Short of that you can rack up some delegates through the caucus process, and you can have your supporters at the convention (though bound to another candidate) through the convention process. But at the end of the day, you need to win a lot of states in order to win the nomination.

The good news is that Paul will have a nice size contingency at the convention, and if they are able to use their influence effectively we can have an impact on the platform and VP selection. Was that our primary goal? Of course not, but since we were unable to propel Paul to victory in state wide primaries, this is the best we can hope for at this stage of the game.

 

[green73]

A great time to HIGHLY RECOMMEND my all-time favorite blog: www.lewrockwell.com

Agreed!

 

[green73]

Yep--doesn't Ron Paul read it daily?

Yes!

 

[green73]

In case anyone forgot (like I did), you click on the name of the user, and it's the third option on the left side of the screen.

This!